Wikipedia:Peer review/1963 San Diego Chargers season/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
 | This peer review discussion is closed. |
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to nominate it for FA status, which I haven't done before (I do have two articles passed as GA).
Thanks, Harper J. Cole (talk) 20:25, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Comments by Z1720
[edit]Hi Harper J. Cole, before nominating this for FAC, I suggest nominating this at GAN so that it will get a thorough review and prepare the article for FAC. I also suggest that you review articles at WP:FAC, to help you understand the FA criteria, clear the FAC backlog, show you what to expect from the process, and build goodwill amongst the FAC reviewers so that your nomination is more likely to be reviewed. Let me know if you have any questions.
Some comments below after a quick skim:
- The first paragraph in "Departures" needs citations at the end of the paragraph
- "John Hadl also saw frequent action, as Head Coach Sid Gillman would frequently insert him into the game if Rote was struggling; Hadl threw at least one pass in 12 regular season games, complementing Rote's 2,510 yards with 502 of his own." This needs a citation
- "The first game between the two leagues, Super Bowl I, occurred three years later." Needs a citation
- In the references, "Pro-Football-Reference.com." is sometimes capitalised, and sometimes it is not. This needs to be standardized.
- 1995–96 Gillingham F.C. season is a recently promoted FA that might give ideas on how to structure this article.
- Use a template in all of the references so they are standardised and formatted properly. (ref 25 especially)
- The references to pro-football-reference and stathead need access dates, and any additional info you can provide. I also suggest that these links are archived.
- Check the references to see if an author is given for the article, even if the author is listed as "Associated Press", and add it to the citation template.
Those are some comments. Z1720 (talk) 15:11, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks - I've made corrections. As you suggest, I'll go via GAN rather than skipping straight to FAC.--Harper J. Cole (talk) 20:11, 22 September 2021 (UTC)